Hello!
The comments on this profile are unclaimed and thus are unverified.
Do they belong to you? Claim these comments.
Mike
Is this you? Claim Profile »
6 months ago
in Why you should support Mac OS X and Linux on Wolfire Blog
@Davie
"Macs were not built for serious gaming..." Not true. Macs have not had many games because many of the original, and current, game engines have been built to use Microsoft's Direct X graphics API environments. While OpenGL is an older system (in some ways better than Direct X, and in other ways not as good) it has not had many good game engines developed on it so any developer looking to build a game for a Mac had to come up with their own engine.
They just did like good business man and took the path of least resistance while coming up with the most profit; hence Windows only games.
The same principal has happened with CAD software in relation to Mac and OSX. Vectorworks, Graphisoft both use software frameworks developed as part of the original Unigraphics CAD system which is Windows only now (as NX from Siemens). The Autodesk guys are just stubborn and profit driven.
I'm new to a Mac but the more I learn about OSX; it's underlying principle technologies, coding environment, and API's; they seem to offer a great number of enticing benefits for all types of applications. From the ability to use a variety of languages, strictly separating the MVC model for ease of use with differing windowing environments, and the ability to port more easily to/from Unix and Linux the more enticing it becomes.
Great article. Maybe other game developers and all types of software developers will take note.
"Macs were not built for serious gaming..." Not true. Macs have not had many games because many of the original, and current, game engines have been built to use Microsoft's Direct X graphics API environments. While OpenGL is an older system (in some ways better than Direct X, and in other ways not as good) it has not had many good game engines developed on it so any developer looking to build a game for a Mac had to come up with their own engine.
They just did like good business man and took the path of least resistance while coming up with the most profit; hence Windows only games.
The same principal has happened with CAD software in relation to Mac and OSX. Vectorworks, Graphisoft both use software frameworks developed as part of the original Unigraphics CAD system which is Windows only now (as NX from Siemens). The Autodesk guys are just stubborn and profit driven.
I'm new to a Mac but the more I learn about OSX; it's underlying principle technologies, coding environment, and API's; they seem to offer a great number of enticing benefits for all types of applications. From the ability to use a variety of languages, strictly separating the MVC model for ease of use with differing windowing environments, and the ability to port more easily to/from Unix and Linux the more enticing it becomes.
Great article. Maybe other game developers and all types of software developers will take note.
9 months ago
in Apply Excitment of OpenGL vs Direct3D Directly to Forehead on SolidSmack
While I don't doubt the validity the argument for Direct3D (who can't argue that money talks). This is strangely contrary to industry moment at the moment towards open source and portable solutions nearly universally.
Portable platform independent standards are coming about in nearly all other sectors of software allowing users to store information in the 'cloud' and developers to create platform independent web and desktop apps allowing users to take their information anywhere on anything they want.
Strangely enough CAD and 3D modeling developers have become the lame duck; following at a very protracted pace to the rest of the industry to embrace open standards (we still don't have an open source answer for DWG; which Autodesk controls ruthlessly).
Honestly I view this as very bad for the industry as a whole. As users continue to switch in droves to alternative Operating Systems (Mac OSX, Linux, even a few UNIX) and methods of communication and work (smart phones, light laptops without the horsepower to run many things) fleeing the junk that is Vista, and Windows Mobile they will increasingly demand open standards so that they can access their own information anywhere and on anything.
To illustrate the point, PC World (perhaps the most widely accepted 'geek' magazine by non-geeks) had an article this month about switching to Linux for small business to avoid the Vista and the ever increasing fees associated with Microsoft per-seat licensing for servers.
As pointed out several places Direct3D is mainly used on computer games, for which there has been a declining demand on the actual PC. Portable (Nintendo DS) and console (Wii, PS3, XBox) games tend to, and have been, the path to big money in gaming for a long time. Much of the software development for these systems and for Direct 3D and OpenGL has been to support advanced quick-render, shader, and VR developments. While this does benefit CAD rendering with more realistic and quick rendering it does not focus on primary 'primitive' object modeling and parametric approaches rapidly gaining steam in the industry. Workstation graphics cards are tuned in this regard and call for a more expensive workstations
as it is; despite using Direct 3D or OpenGL.
Any way you slice it it seems that the CAD industry is just needs to pull their heads out of their own rear-ends and see what is happening all around.
I'm in support of OpenGL but it would be equally beneficial if Microsoft just opened up it's Direct 3D and Direct X implementations.
Portable platform independent standards are coming about in nearly all other sectors of software allowing users to store information in the 'cloud' and developers to create platform independent web and desktop apps allowing users to take their information anywhere on anything they want.
Strangely enough CAD and 3D modeling developers have become the lame duck; following at a very protracted pace to the rest of the industry to embrace open standards (we still don't have an open source answer for DWG; which Autodesk controls ruthlessly).
Honestly I view this as very bad for the industry as a whole. As users continue to switch in droves to alternative Operating Systems (Mac OSX, Linux, even a few UNIX) and methods of communication and work (smart phones, light laptops without the horsepower to run many things) fleeing the junk that is Vista, and Windows Mobile they will increasingly demand open standards so that they can access their own information anywhere and on anything.
To illustrate the point, PC World (perhaps the most widely accepted 'geek' magazine by non-geeks) had an article this month about switching to Linux for small business to avoid the Vista and the ever increasing fees associated with Microsoft per-seat licensing for servers.
As pointed out several places Direct3D is mainly used on computer games, for which there has been a declining demand on the actual PC. Portable (Nintendo DS) and console (Wii, PS3, XBox) games tend to, and have been, the path to big money in gaming for a long time. Much of the software development for these systems and for Direct 3D and OpenGL has been to support advanced quick-render, shader, and VR developments. While this does benefit CAD rendering with more realistic and quick rendering it does not focus on primary 'primitive' object modeling and parametric approaches rapidly gaining steam in the industry. Workstation graphics cards are tuned in this regard and call for a more expensive workstations
as it is; despite using Direct 3D or OpenGL.
Any way you slice it it seems that the CAD industry is just needs to pull their heads out of their own rear-ends and see what is happening all around.
I'm in support of OpenGL but it would be equally beneficial if Microsoft just opened up it's Direct 3D and Direct X implementations.
